In nearly four decades of working in international affairs, I have never seen anything like it. By ‘it’, I refer to the size of the gap between what we claim to be and what we actually do — as brutally reflected in the selective blindness of most Western governments on Gaza.

This has profound practical as well as moral implications. Immense damage has been done to the way much of the world sees us — despite the fact that in a time of global polarisation, authoritarianism, and realignment, ‘soft’ power and influence is more critical than ever.  

Efforts by the UK government to narrow the gap and repair some of the damage are essential.  Luckily it has an opportunity to start acting more in accordance with our nation’s values, interests, and laws. Yesterday, a final four-day hearing began at the High Court regarding export licences for British-made components of the multi-nation F-35 fighter jet.  

Israel has been using these planes to truly lethal effect, including dropping massive 2000-pound bombs that destroy entire civilian neighbourhoods, and targeting schools, hospitals, shelters, and camps for displaced civilians. As a result, even the Biden administration blocked a shipment of those munitions. Since the Gazans have no air defences, there’s no need for the F-35’s stealth capacity, so the Israelis have modified their jets into what they call ‘Beast Mode’, meaning the planes can carry more bombs and cause yet more carnage.  

Some have questioned — not very convincingly — the provisional ruling of the International Court of Justice on Gaza or the findings by UN bodies, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch regarding ‘genocide’. But what’s beyond any doubt is that war crimes of many types have been carried out by the IDF on a sustained and systematic basis in Gaza. 

It is 18 months since the horrific attack by Hamas, and yet Israel’s response — disproportionate within the very first weeks — continues to escalate even now. The Gaza strip has seen apocalyptic destruction, the deaths of well over 52,000 people as a direct result of military attacks alone, the cut-off of all essential supplies leading to starvation, and the deliberate killing of hundreds of aid workers, doctors, journalists, and UN staff. 

To our lasting shame, the UK government has spent this whole period providing significant legal, political, and military aid to Israel’s actions. The High Court challenge seeks to restrict one small part of that support.

After all, it is hardly controversial to argue that arms shouldn’t be exported to states that abuse them. Indeed, last September, the UK suspended a number of arms export licenses to Israel, citing the ‘clear risk’ that they could be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law (i.e., war crimes).   

But various reasons were advanced for exempting British components for the F-35 from this decision. One argument was that it was difficult to track which components enter which aircraft or country through the programme. Given the many available means for tracking high-tech material through supply chains, this seems highly implausible. In addition, an inability to track where our most sophisticated weaponry goes surely presents a risk to our national security as much as to our moral commitments.  

The government has also argued that it would risk ‘prejudicing the entire global F-35 programme, including its broader strategic role in NATO and military support to Ukraine’. But F-35s have not been sent to Ukraine (despite many pleas from Kyiv); moreover, countries participating in the F-35 programme have been removed on political grounds before, such as Turkey in 2019. 

What seems to be the real motivation for green-lighting the UK components is fear of antagonising Washington. Granted, in the era of the alarming Trump-Putin convergence, this is an important consideration. But it shouldn’t be the only one, not when we are seen to be aiding and abetting actions that almost all of us know constitute some of the worst war crimes in recent times. 

There’s also self-interest in trying to set some limits to the use of UK-supplied weaponry for such purposes. As a nation largely reliant on our soft power for global influence, we gain little from the collapse of anything resembling a rules-based order, with no restraint urged on or exercised by those who possess overwhelming military power.  

Ending the supply of British-made components to the F-35s that are used to terrorise the Gazan population will not, of course, persuade the Israeli Air Force/IDF to end its violations overnight — or prevent the rising global tide of impunity.

It would, however, send a clear signal about where the UK stands in terms of its own laws and values. And it would embolden all those, in Western countries and beyond, who believe in both the moral and strategic necessity of showing some consistency when it comes to preaching about the rule of law.